Tuesday, November 26, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: "APPARENT AUTHORITY" MARYLAND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: "APPARENT AUTHORITY" MARYLAND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ...: www.charlesjeromeware.com . " Here to make a difference. We fight, you win." SONG C. LOPEZ-KRIST, Individually and as Parent and...
"APPARENT AUTHORITY" MARYLAND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CASE: Lopez-Krist v. Salvagno,M.D.,et al.
www.charlesjeromeware.com. " Here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
SONG C. LOPEZ-KRIST, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of N.R.J-L,
a minor, Plaintiffs, v. RALPH T. SALVAGNO, M.D., et al., Defendants, Civil
Action No. ELH - 12 - 01116, U.S. Dist. Ct. of Maryland (October 17th, 2013).
In this medical malpractice case, plaintiffs Song Lopez-Krist, individually and as parent and next friend of her minor son N.R.J-L (the "minor"), filed a lawsuit against Ralph T. Salvagno, M.D.;
his professional association, the Center for Joint Surgery and Sports Medicine, P.A. ("JSSM");
and Meritus Medical Center, Inc. ("Meritus"), arising out of an above-the-knee amputation of
the minor's right leg on September 24, 2010.
Plaintiffs allege that Dr. Salvagno, an orthopedic surgeon, breached the standard of care in his
treatment of N.R.J-L, and that Dr. Salvagno's negligence was the proximate cause of the
amputation. Plaintiffs also sought to hold the medical center, Emeritus, vicariously liable for Dr. Salvagno's alleged negligence, claiming that Dr. Salvagno was the actual or apparent agent of Meritus.
Emeritus, of course, argued that Dr. Salvagno was an independent contractor. Apparently, there is a dispute as to whether Dr. Salvagno actually identified himself to the Plaintiffs either way --- independent contractor or agent of Meritus.
Bothe Plaintiffs and defendant Emeritus filed competing motions for summary judgment, both related to the issue of agency. The District Court judge denied both motions. This means the issue of whether an agency relationship existed between defendant Dr. Salvagno and defendant Meritus
Medical Center will be decided by the jury in this case, or perhaps by a directed verdict after all of the evidence is in. This is an interesting case to follow on the issue of agency for Maryland tort lawyers.
SONG C. LOPEZ-KRIST, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of N.R.J-L,
a minor, Plaintiffs, v. RALPH T. SALVAGNO, M.D., et al., Defendants, Civil
Action No. ELH - 12 - 01116, U.S. Dist. Ct. of Maryland (October 17th, 2013).
In this medical malpractice case, plaintiffs Song Lopez-Krist, individually and as parent and next friend of her minor son N.R.J-L (the "minor"), filed a lawsuit against Ralph T. Salvagno, M.D.;
his professional association, the Center for Joint Surgery and Sports Medicine, P.A. ("JSSM");
and Meritus Medical Center, Inc. ("Meritus"), arising out of an above-the-knee amputation of
the minor's right leg on September 24, 2010.
Plaintiffs allege that Dr. Salvagno, an orthopedic surgeon, breached the standard of care in his
treatment of N.R.J-L, and that Dr. Salvagno's negligence was the proximate cause of the
amputation. Plaintiffs also sought to hold the medical center, Emeritus, vicariously liable for Dr. Salvagno's alleged negligence, claiming that Dr. Salvagno was the actual or apparent agent of Meritus.
Emeritus, of course, argued that Dr. Salvagno was an independent contractor. Apparently, there is a dispute as to whether Dr. Salvagno actually identified himself to the Plaintiffs either way --- independent contractor or agent of Meritus.
Bothe Plaintiffs and defendant Emeritus filed competing motions for summary judgment, both related to the issue of agency. The District Court judge denied both motions. This means the issue of whether an agency relationship existed between defendant Dr. Salvagno and defendant Meritus
Medical Center will be decided by the jury in this case, or perhaps by a directed verdict after all of the evidence is in. This is an interesting case to follow on the issue of agency for Maryland tort lawyers.
The Lawyer's Mailbox: ARRESTED IN MARYLAND ? CALL US : www.charlesjerome...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: ARRESTED IN MARYLAND ? CALL US : www.charlesjerome...: The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, M...
ARRESTED IN MARYLAND ? CALL US : www.charlesjeromeware.com
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently
headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. For an initial courtesy consultation
concerning your arrest, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, (410) 720-6129.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
What is an arrest ?
An arrest is the taking, seizing or detaining of an individual by touching or putting hands on a
person or taking action that indicates an intention to take the individual into custody and subjects
the person to the control and the will of the individual(s) making the arrest. The person usually making an arrest is a law enforcement officer, although the so-called "citizen's arrest" is possible
in some circumstances.
When an individual is lawfully arrested, his or her person as well as the immediate area of their place of arrest may be searched. If the individual is arrested in their home by law enforcement, officers may also conduct a limited search for persons outside the immediate area of the arrest.
What are your rights if arrested ?
If arrested and taken into custody, you have the right to:
1. Be informed of the charges against you and the allowable penalties;
2. Obtain an attorney to represent you, even before being asked questions by the police
(that is, questions beyond your name, address, and other routine processing questions);
3. If you can show you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you ( a
Public Attorney);
4. Have a judge decide whether you should be released from jail until you have your
trial ( bail review); and
5. Remain silent ( Your silence cannot be used against you in your case).
What is an arrest warrant ?
An arrest warrant is a written order ( a document) signed by a judge which commands the police to arrest the person named in the warrant.
[ This information is not intended to be legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed or
created by this blog]
[ And see, http://www.msba.org/departments/commpubl/publications/brochures/Your Legal Rights If Arrested; Understanding the Law : A Primer, by Attorney Charles Jerome Ware, http://amzn.com/1440111456]
headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. For an initial courtesy consultation
concerning your arrest, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, (410) 720-6129.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
What is an arrest ?
An arrest is the taking, seizing or detaining of an individual by touching or putting hands on a
person or taking action that indicates an intention to take the individual into custody and subjects
the person to the control and the will of the individual(s) making the arrest. The person usually making an arrest is a law enforcement officer, although the so-called "citizen's arrest" is possible
in some circumstances.
When an individual is lawfully arrested, his or her person as well as the immediate area of their place of arrest may be searched. If the individual is arrested in their home by law enforcement, officers may also conduct a limited search for persons outside the immediate area of the arrest.
What are your rights if arrested ?
If arrested and taken into custody, you have the right to:
1. Be informed of the charges against you and the allowable penalties;
2. Obtain an attorney to represent you, even before being asked questions by the police
(that is, questions beyond your name, address, and other routine processing questions);
3. If you can show you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you ( a
Public Attorney);
4. Have a judge decide whether you should be released from jail until you have your
trial ( bail review); and
5. Remain silent ( Your silence cannot be used against you in your case).
What is an arrest warrant ?
An arrest warrant is a written order ( a document) signed by a judge which commands the police to arrest the person named in the warrant.
[ This information is not intended to be legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed or
created by this blog]
[ And see, http://www.msba.org/departments/commpubl/publications/brochures/Your Legal Rights If Arrested; Understanding the Law : A Primer, by Attorney Charles Jerome Ware, http://amzn.com/1440111456]
Monday, November 25, 2013
EMPLOYERS USE FACEBOOK TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST APPLICANTS,www.charlesjeromeware.com
www.charlesjeromeware.com. "Here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
This probably should be no surprise.
A new study by Researchers at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Mellon University shows that many
employers check out or look up job applicants on Facebook and/or other social media online
early in the hiring process for unprofessional and other frowned-upon behavior. However, the
study also revealed other discriminatory use of applicants' online profiles; such as discrimination
against Muslims.
The Carnegie Mellon researchers sent more than 4,000 fake resumes to private companies with
online job openings. Four fake, male job applicants were created, and each one had a unique name to avoid confusion for employers consulting Facebook profiles created for the experiment. One
appeared to be Muslim, one Christian, one" gay", and one " straight."
The findings were: The gay and straight applicants got about an equal number of callbacks for interviews; but Christians got more callbacks than Muslims, particularly in the " 10 most-Republi-
can leaning States." in those conservative areas, 17.3% of the Christians got callbacks, compared to only 2.3% of the Muslims.
The 10 states were Alabama. Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Utah, West
Virginia and Wyoming. These states were identified based on 2012 election data.
[http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/Some Employers Use Facebook To Discriminate Against
Job Applicants, Study Says;http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/Bosses May Use Social Media To Discriminate Against Job Seekers; http;?/triblive.com/business/headlines/Employers Discriminate Based On Job Candidate's Personal Info On Social Media ]
This probably should be no surprise.
A new study by Researchers at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Mellon University shows that many
employers check out or look up job applicants on Facebook and/or other social media online
early in the hiring process for unprofessional and other frowned-upon behavior. However, the
study also revealed other discriminatory use of applicants' online profiles; such as discrimination
against Muslims.
The Carnegie Mellon researchers sent more than 4,000 fake resumes to private companies with
online job openings. Four fake, male job applicants were created, and each one had a unique name to avoid confusion for employers consulting Facebook profiles created for the experiment. One
appeared to be Muslim, one Christian, one" gay", and one " straight."
The findings were: The gay and straight applicants got about an equal number of callbacks for interviews; but Christians got more callbacks than Muslims, particularly in the " 10 most-Republi-
can leaning States." in those conservative areas, 17.3% of the Christians got callbacks, compared to only 2.3% of the Muslims.
The 10 states were Alabama. Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Utah, West
Virginia and Wyoming. These states were identified based on 2012 election data.
[http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/Some Employers Use Facebook To Discriminate Against
Job Applicants, Study Says;http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/Bosses May Use Social Media To Discriminate Against Job Seekers; http;?/triblive.com/business/headlines/Employers Discriminate Based On Job Candidate's Personal Info On Social Media ]
Friday, November 22, 2013
"JUNK SCIENCE LAW " AIDS RELEASE OF "SAN ANTONIO 4"
www.charlesjeromeware.com. " We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
This information is presented for informational purposes only, not as legal advice.
Dateline: Monday, November 18, 2013. --- Three Texas women who were convicted in 1998 of
allegedly sexually abusing two girls in 1994 have been released from prison after 15 years incar-
creation, thanks to a new "junk science law" in Texas. The 3, along with a fourth co-defendant, are known as the " San Antonio 4", and were accused at trial of holding down the two girls, touching their breasts, and pouring liquid and white powder into their vaginas.
The four convicted women --- Kristie Mayhugh, Cassandra Rivera, Elizabeth Ramirez and Anna Vasquez- ---have consistently proclaimed their innocence throughout the many years of incarceration. Anna Vasquez was released on parole in 2012. The younger girl of the two alleged victims has stated to defense attorneys and the media that the alleged attacks never happened.
At trial in 1998, a child abuse expert testified that one of the girls had a scar her hymen that indicated abuse. Scientific advances now show that torn hymens do not leave scars. Additionally, the two girls'
testimony had many inconsistences.
1994 was a time of headline-making ritualistic child abuse cases. The new Texas " Junk Science Law" allowed evidence to be considered in reviewing the case that discredited the alleged child
abuse expert doctor's testimony.
The allegations of group abuse, an injected liquid and a lot screaming were typical in 1994 in day-care child abuse cases that were featured in the news just prior to the prosecution of the San Antonio 4.
The Bexar County, Texas District Attorney, Susan Reed, has confirmed that she will not seek a retrial of the case.
[www.abajournal.com/news/article/ Were Women Convicted In "Ritual of 'San Antonio 4' Freed
Pending New Trial Decision, Lawyer Says]
This information is presented for informational purposes only, not as legal advice.
Dateline: Monday, November 18, 2013. --- Three Texas women who were convicted in 1998 of
allegedly sexually abusing two girls in 1994 have been released from prison after 15 years incar-
creation, thanks to a new "junk science law" in Texas. The 3, along with a fourth co-defendant, are known as the " San Antonio 4", and were accused at trial of holding down the two girls, touching their breasts, and pouring liquid and white powder into their vaginas.
The four convicted women --- Kristie Mayhugh, Cassandra Rivera, Elizabeth Ramirez and Anna Vasquez- ---have consistently proclaimed their innocence throughout the many years of incarceration. Anna Vasquez was released on parole in 2012. The younger girl of the two alleged victims has stated to defense attorneys and the media that the alleged attacks never happened.
At trial in 1998, a child abuse expert testified that one of the girls had a scar her hymen that indicated abuse. Scientific advances now show that torn hymens do not leave scars. Additionally, the two girls'
testimony had many inconsistences.
1994 was a time of headline-making ritualistic child abuse cases. The new Texas " Junk Science Law" allowed evidence to be considered in reviewing the case that discredited the alleged child
abuse expert doctor's testimony.
The allegations of group abuse, an injected liquid and a lot screaming were typical in 1994 in day-care child abuse cases that were featured in the news just prior to the prosecution of the San Antonio 4.
The Bexar County, Texas District Attorney, Susan Reed, has confirmed that she will not seek a retrial of the case.
[www.abajournal.com/news/article/ Were Women Convicted In "Ritual of 'San Antonio 4' Freed
Pending New Trial Decision, Lawyer Says]
The Lawyer's Mailbox: NEW LAWS ALERT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, OCTOBER 1st, 20...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: NEW LAWS ALERT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, OCTOBER 1st, 20...: www.charlesjeromeware.com . " Here to make a difference." This blog is not intended as legal advice, but for informational purp...
NEW LAWS ALERT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, OCTOBER 1st, 2013 !
www.charlesjeromeware.com. " Here to make a difference." This blog is not intended as legal advice, but for informational purposes only.
In Maryland, a long list of new laws went into effect on Tuesday, October 1st, 2013.
The following are some of these new laws which will most likely impact the daily lives
of most residents in Howard County :
1. HANDHELD DEVICES. In Maryland, using a handheld device (cellphone, etc.) while driving has been a "secondary offense" ; meaning that drivers must first be committing another offense such
as speeding or negligent driving in order to be ticketed for using the handheld device. That has now changed. Effective October 1st, 2013, using a handheld device while driving became a " primary offense " : which means drivers can get a ticket if they are using the device ( phone), even if they are not breaking any other traffic laws. The fine ranges from $ 75 for the first offense to a maximum of $ 175 for the third offense and over.
2. SEAT BELT LAW. The new Maryland seat belt law makes it a " primary offense" to drive or to be a
passenger in the front seat of a vehicle without a seat belt. The fine is $ 50.
3. TOLL BOOTH VIOLATIONS. Drivers who go through toll booths at bridges or on the Intercounty Connector without paying the toll could eventually face problems with their vehicle registration. Initially, drivers are notified of the past-due tolls by mail and have 30 days from the mail date to pay. If the driver pays in time, the case is closed. However, if after that no payment is received, Maryland Transportation Authority (MTA) will issue a $ 50 ticket on top of the original toll; which the driver can challenge in court or pay up. Finally, if the citation (and ticket) are then not paid, the driver's vehicle registration will be flagged for nor-renewal or suspension.
4. GUN LAWS. The new gun laws require, inter alia, safety training and fingerprinting to purchase a handgun, and they limit bullet magazines to 10 rounds of ammunition. A total of 45 different assault
weapons are also banned from sell and purchase in the state.
5. CYBERBULLYING. A new cyberbullying law, also known as " Grace's Law", makes it a
criminal offense to use an interactive computer service, such as Twitter of Facebook, to cause
" serious emotional distress on a minor" or causes the minor to fear for his or her life or physical
safety.
6. LAWN CARE. There are new laws in effect concerning the manufacture and distribution of
fertilizer for lawns in Maryland. The stated goal is to protect the Chesapeake Bay from run-off
damage.
7. WORKPLACE PREGNANCY. This new law is designed to insure that pregnant women cannot be denied certain reasonable accomodations at work.
{ This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not intended as legal advice for anyone. Consult
your attorney for legal advice and consultation}
8. DEATH PENALTY. There is no longer the death penalty in Maryland.
9. DRUGS. Certain chemicals used "recreationally", such as "Spice" and "K2", are now designated
as controlled dangerous substances (CDS) and are thus illegal in Maryland.
In Maryland, a long list of new laws went into effect on Tuesday, October 1st, 2013.
The following are some of these new laws which will most likely impact the daily lives
of most residents in Howard County :
1. HANDHELD DEVICES. In Maryland, using a handheld device (cellphone, etc.) while driving has been a "secondary offense" ; meaning that drivers must first be committing another offense such
as speeding or negligent driving in order to be ticketed for using the handheld device. That has now changed. Effective October 1st, 2013, using a handheld device while driving became a " primary offense " : which means drivers can get a ticket if they are using the device ( phone), even if they are not breaking any other traffic laws. The fine ranges from $ 75 for the first offense to a maximum of $ 175 for the third offense and over.
2. SEAT BELT LAW. The new Maryland seat belt law makes it a " primary offense" to drive or to be a
passenger in the front seat of a vehicle without a seat belt. The fine is $ 50.
3. TOLL BOOTH VIOLATIONS. Drivers who go through toll booths at bridges or on the Intercounty Connector without paying the toll could eventually face problems with their vehicle registration. Initially, drivers are notified of the past-due tolls by mail and have 30 days from the mail date to pay. If the driver pays in time, the case is closed. However, if after that no payment is received, Maryland Transportation Authority (MTA) will issue a $ 50 ticket on top of the original toll; which the driver can challenge in court or pay up. Finally, if the citation (and ticket) are then not paid, the driver's vehicle registration will be flagged for nor-renewal or suspension.
4. GUN LAWS. The new gun laws require, inter alia, safety training and fingerprinting to purchase a handgun, and they limit bullet magazines to 10 rounds of ammunition. A total of 45 different assault
weapons are also banned from sell and purchase in the state.
5. CYBERBULLYING. A new cyberbullying law, also known as " Grace's Law", makes it a
criminal offense to use an interactive computer service, such as Twitter of Facebook, to cause
" serious emotional distress on a minor" or causes the minor to fear for his or her life or physical
safety.
6. LAWN CARE. There are new laws in effect concerning the manufacture and distribution of
fertilizer for lawns in Maryland. The stated goal is to protect the Chesapeake Bay from run-off
damage.
7. WORKPLACE PREGNANCY. This new law is designed to insure that pregnant women cannot be denied certain reasonable accomodations at work.
{ This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not intended as legal advice for anyone. Consult
your attorney for legal advice and consultation}
8. DEATH PENALTY. There is no longer the death penalty in Maryland.
9. DRUGS. Certain chemicals used "recreationally", such as "Spice" and "K2", are now designated
as controlled dangerous substances (CDS) and are thus illegal in Maryland.
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND " GRANNY CAM " ALERT: COMBATTING ELDER AB...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND " GRANNY CAM " ALERT: COMBATTING ELDER AB...: Attorney Charles Ware was the founder in 1992 of the highly successful " MARYLAND ELDER ABUSE HOTLINE." He is also the founder a...
MARYLAND " GRANNY CAM " ALERT: COMBATTING ELDER ABUSE,www.charlesjeromeware.com
Attorney Charles Ware was the founder in 1992 of the highly successful "MARYLAND ELDER ABUSE HOTLINE." He is also the founder and managing partner of Charles Jerome Ware, P. A.,
Attorneys & Counselors, a nationally-renowned and respected law firm which is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland --- equi-distant between Baltimore and
Washington, D. C. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact the firm's attorneys at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129. The information provided in this
blog is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice; nor does this blog and/or its contents create an attorney-client relationship with the reader.
There are four states that currently provide legal guidance or guidelines for nursing home and assisted living facility "electronic monitoring' : which includes surveillance video-cameras and recordings, both concealed and revealed, etc. Those four states are, in order of enactment, TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, MARYLAND and OKLAHOMA. The Maryland Guidelines for Electronic Monitoring",
Maryland Office of Health Care Quality, page 3, released December 1, 2013, are available at http://dhmh.maryland.gov/ohcq/LTC/Docs/Reports/149report.pdf.
Despite ongoing industry and government efforts aimed at improving the condition of residents
in nursing homes and assisted living facilities, inter alia, mistreatment unfortunately remains a significant problem in aging services settings. Based upon reported incidents, some experts estimate that at least one in 20 residents of nursing homes and assisted living facilities in the United States
experience some form of abuse. Further, the U. S. Administration on Aging suggests that for each documented instance of neglect, at least 5 go unreported [ see, Cottle, N., " 'Big Brother' and Grandma: An Argument for Video Surveillance in Nursing Homes", THE ELDER LAW JOURNAL, June 2004, Volume 12, pages 122-123 ].
Video surveillance systems ( so-called " granny cams") are quickly becoming an affordable and efficient way to ensure vulnerable seniors stay safe when in the care of others, whether with an in-home caretaker,
a nursing home, a hospital, assisted living facility, or other type of managed care facility. These
surveillance systems can also provide a clear picture of how an elderly person is getting along on their own, or it can capture mistreatment [http://www.seniorcare.net/Are Granny Cams Ethical ?]
Attorneys & Counselors, a nationally-renowned and respected law firm which is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland --- equi-distant between Baltimore and
Washington, D. C. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact the firm's attorneys at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129. The information provided in this
blog is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice; nor does this blog and/or its contents create an attorney-client relationship with the reader.
There are four states that currently provide legal guidance or guidelines for nursing home and assisted living facility "electronic monitoring' : which includes surveillance video-cameras and recordings, both concealed and revealed, etc. Those four states are, in order of enactment, TEXAS, NEW MEXICO, MARYLAND and OKLAHOMA. The Maryland Guidelines for Electronic Monitoring",
Maryland Office of Health Care Quality, page 3, released December 1, 2013, are available at http://dhmh.maryland.gov/ohcq/LTC/Docs/Reports/149report.pdf.
Despite ongoing industry and government efforts aimed at improving the condition of residents
in nursing homes and assisted living facilities, inter alia, mistreatment unfortunately remains a significant problem in aging services settings. Based upon reported incidents, some experts estimate that at least one in 20 residents of nursing homes and assisted living facilities in the United States
experience some form of abuse. Further, the U. S. Administration on Aging suggests that for each documented instance of neglect, at least 5 go unreported [ see, Cottle, N., " 'Big Brother' and Grandma: An Argument for Video Surveillance in Nursing Homes", THE ELDER LAW JOURNAL, June 2004, Volume 12, pages 122-123 ].
Video surveillance systems ( so-called " granny cams") are quickly becoming an affordable and efficient way to ensure vulnerable seniors stay safe when in the care of others, whether with an in-home caretaker,
a nursing home, a hospital, assisted living facility, or other type of managed care facility. These
surveillance systems can also provide a clear picture of how an elderly person is getting along on their own, or it can capture mistreatment [http://www.seniorcare.net/Are Granny Cams Ethical ?]
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: CHARLES WARE'S LEGAL TIPS FOR MARYLAND HOLIDAY PAR...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: CHARLES WARE'S LEGAL TIPS FOR MARYLAND HOLIDAY PAR...: Charles Ware is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, which is headquartered conven...
CHARLES WARE'S LEGAL TIPS FOR MARYLAND HOLIDAY PARTIES : Cheers !
Charles Ware is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, which is headquartered conveniently in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland --- between Baltimore and Washington. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730- 5016 or (410) 720-6129.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
November, December and January may bring more than holiday cheer for many Americans. Surveys reveal that holiday parties in both homes and offices can result all too often in trips to the courthouse
for many. Some tips I recommend for my clients to avoid lawsuits are as follows:
1. DO NOT DRINK AND DRIVE. Have someone volunteer as a non-alcohol drinking driver
for you, if you plan to drink alcohol. DUIs and DWIs are prevalent during the holidays.
2. AS THE HOST OR HOSTESS FOR A HOLIDAY PARTY at which alcohol is served, be
aware of how much your guests are drinking, and respond accordingly. Most people are not
aware that a party host in many jurisdictions in the U.S. who serves alcohol to a clearly inebriated
(drunk) guest may be legally responsible if that person goes on to hurt or kill someone in a car accident.
3. BEWARE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT. It was said a number of years ago by a court that
office holiday parties (including those in homes) are a " fertile ground for unwanted sexual overtures" that often lead to complaints. S + C + A = D ( Stress from work plus a chance to cut loose plus alcohol equals a recipe for Disaster).
4. DISCRIMINATION. Be sensitive to the fact that your company probably employs people who practice a variety of religions and celebrate a variety of holidays. Be sure it is clear to all employees that attendance at the company's holiday party is optional.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
November, December and January may bring more than holiday cheer for many Americans. Surveys reveal that holiday parties in both homes and offices can result all too often in trips to the courthouse
for many. Some tips I recommend for my clients to avoid lawsuits are as follows:
1. DO NOT DRINK AND DRIVE. Have someone volunteer as a non-alcohol drinking driver
for you, if you plan to drink alcohol. DUIs and DWIs are prevalent during the holidays.
2. AS THE HOST OR HOSTESS FOR A HOLIDAY PARTY at which alcohol is served, be
aware of how much your guests are drinking, and respond accordingly. Most people are not
aware that a party host in many jurisdictions in the U.S. who serves alcohol to a clearly inebriated
(drunk) guest may be legally responsible if that person goes on to hurt or kill someone in a car accident.
3. BEWARE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT. It was said a number of years ago by a court that
office holiday parties (including those in homes) are a " fertile ground for unwanted sexual overtures" that often lead to complaints. S + C + A = D ( Stress from work plus a chance to cut loose plus alcohol equals a recipe for Disaster).
4. DISCRIMINATION. Be sensitive to the fact that your company probably employs people who practice a variety of religions and celebrate a variety of holidays. Be sure it is clear to all employees that attendance at the company's holiday party is optional.
The Lawyer's Mailbox: SCOTUS 4th Amendment Update : Georgia v. Randolph,...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: SCOTUS 4th Amendment Update : Georgia v. Randolph,...: This blog is presented for informational purposes only, and not as legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is intended nor incurred be...
SCOTUS 4th Amendment Update : Georgia v. Randolph, Fernandez v. California
This blog is presented for informational purposes only, and not as legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is intended nor incurred between this law firm and the reader as a result of this blog.
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P. A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in the Maryland - D.C metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact
us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is, again, analyzing a 4th Amendment case:
FERNANDEZ v. CALIFORNIA, Docket No. 12-7822, Opinion Below: California Court of Appeals, Argument : November 13, 2013, SCOTUS Term: October 2013.
The Issue is: Whether, under GEORGIA v. RANDOLPH, 547 U.S. 103, 126 S. Ct. 1515,
164 L. Ed. 2d 208 (2006), a defendant must be personally present and objecting when police officers ask a co-tenant for consent to conduct a warrantless search or whether a defendant's previously stated objection, while physically present, to a warrantless search is a continuing assertion of Fourth Amendment rights which cannot be overridden by a co-tenant.
In their 2006 decision in Georgia v, Randolph, SCOTUS ruled 5 to 3 that the police may not get permission from one co-occupant to enter a home without a warrant when another co-occupant
is present and expressly refuses to consent.
[ For additional information see: http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/November 1, 2013/High Court Tackles Another 4th Amendment Case; http://www.scotusblo.com/case-files/Fernandez v. California]
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P. A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in the Maryland - D.C metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact
us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is, again, analyzing a 4th Amendment case:
FERNANDEZ v. CALIFORNIA, Docket No. 12-7822, Opinion Below: California Court of Appeals, Argument : November 13, 2013, SCOTUS Term: October 2013.
The Issue is: Whether, under GEORGIA v. RANDOLPH, 547 U.S. 103, 126 S. Ct. 1515,
164 L. Ed. 2d 208 (2006), a defendant must be personally present and objecting when police officers ask a co-tenant for consent to conduct a warrantless search or whether a defendant's previously stated objection, while physically present, to a warrantless search is a continuing assertion of Fourth Amendment rights which cannot be overridden by a co-tenant.
In their 2006 decision in Georgia v, Randolph, SCOTUS ruled 5 to 3 that the police may not get permission from one co-occupant to enter a home without a warrant when another co-occupant
is present and expressly refuses to consent.
[ For additional information see: http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/November 1, 2013/High Court Tackles Another 4th Amendment Case; http://www.scotusblo.com/case-files/Fernandez v. California]
The Lawyer's Mailbox: The Lawyer's Mailbox: "CREEPY" INS. DEFENSE ATTY. ...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: The Lawyer's Mailbox: "CREEPY" INS. DEFENSE ATTY. ...: The Lawyer's Mailbox: "CREEPY" INS. DEFENSE ATTY. PROVOKES NEW DENTAL MA... : This medical malpractice update by the national ...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: "CREEPY" INS. DEFENSE ATTY. PROVOKES NEW DENTAL MA...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: "CREEPY" INS. DEFENSE ATTY. PROVOKES NEW DENTAL MA...: This medical malpractice update by the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is presented for informat...
"CREEPY" INS. DEFENSE ATTY. PROVOKES NEW DENTAL MAL. TRIAL, www.charlesjeromeware.com
This medical malpractice update by the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is presented for informational purposes only and not as legal advice. The information in this blog is not intended to, and does not, create any attorney-client relationship with the reader nor anyone else.
The plaintiffs' medical malpractice law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A. is conveniently headquartered in the Maryland - D. C. metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
TRIAL JUDGE THROWS OUT DEFENSE JURY VERDICT IN DENTAL MALPRACTICE CASE DUE TO "CREEPY... STALKING" CONDUCT OF
INSURER'S LAWYER WATCHING THE TRIAL
[ Kelly Varano, as parent and natural guardian of infant JEREMY BOHN, vs. FORBA
Holdings, LLC n/k/a Church Street Health Management, LLC, ET AL., Index No. 2011-2128, RJI No. 33-11-1413, Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Onondaga ( November 18, 2013)]
New York state judge Deborah H. Karalunas has overturned a dental malpractice case due to the " creepy" and " stalking" conduct of lawyer Scott Greenspan, who was hired by a major professional liability insurance company to " follow trial developments" as a spectator in the case.
Judge Karalunas wrote in her order issued on Monday, November 18th, 2013 that Manhattan lawyer Scott Greenspan " violated the sanctity of the jury" by engaging in behavior described by a juror as "creepy", and at the very least came close to " stalking" the six jurors.
It is alleged that Greenspan's conduct included, among other behaviors during the 15-day trial,, trailing ("stalking") jurors during their lunch breaks , videotaping them outside of the courthouse, and even getting on the courthouse elevators with them.
" I have never seen an attorney go as far out of line as this lawyer did', said the judge, adding:
" To me it's dumbfounding."
The plaintiffs' medical malpractice law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A. is conveniently headquartered in the Maryland - D. C. metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129.
" We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
TRIAL JUDGE THROWS OUT DEFENSE JURY VERDICT IN DENTAL MALPRACTICE CASE DUE TO "CREEPY... STALKING" CONDUCT OF
INSURER'S LAWYER WATCHING THE TRIAL
[ Kelly Varano, as parent and natural guardian of infant JEREMY BOHN, vs. FORBA
Holdings, LLC n/k/a Church Street Health Management, LLC, ET AL., Index No. 2011-2128, RJI No. 33-11-1413, Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Onondaga ( November 18, 2013)]
New York state judge Deborah H. Karalunas has overturned a dental malpractice case due to the " creepy" and " stalking" conduct of lawyer Scott Greenspan, who was hired by a major professional liability insurance company to " follow trial developments" as a spectator in the case.
Judge Karalunas wrote in her order issued on Monday, November 18th, 2013 that Manhattan lawyer Scott Greenspan " violated the sanctity of the jury" by engaging in behavior described by a juror as "creepy", and at the very least came close to " stalking" the six jurors.
It is alleged that Greenspan's conduct included, among other behaviors during the 15-day trial,, trailing ("stalking") jurors during their lunch breaks , videotaping them outside of the courthouse, and even getting on the courthouse elevators with them.
" I have never seen an attorney go as far out of line as this lawyer did', said the judge, adding:
" To me it's dumbfounding."
The Lawyer's Mailbox: The ERYETHA MAYBERRY Nursing Home Abuse Case in Ok...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: The ERYETHA MAYBERRY Nursing Home Abuse Case in Ok...: The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in the Maryland - D.C metropol...
The ERYETHA MAYBERRY Nursing Home Abuse Case in Oklahoma,www.charlesjeromeware.com
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in the Maryland - D.C metropolitan area. The firm is nationally-recognized and highly-regarded for it successful legal work on behalf of victims of elder and nursing home abuse. For
an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com , (410) 730-5016 or
(410) 720-6129. " We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."\
The tragic real-life story of Eryetha Mayberry gives credence to the value of having hidden motion-activated video cameras in the rooms of nursing home residents.
In 2012, after noticing that her 96-year old dementia-suffering mother's (Eryetha Mayberry's) gifts
were disappearing from her room in the nursing home in Oklahoma City, Doris Racher placed a motion-activated camera in the room. What she and her family discovered was a situation much worse than theft.
The video-camera revealed two female nursing home aides torturing the helpless Eryetha Mayberry.
While one aide stuffed latex gloves into Mrs. Mayberry's mouth, the other one taunted her by tapping on Mrs. Mayberry's head and laughing at her. Unceremoniously hoisting her from her wheelchair, the two culprits literally flung Mrs. Mayberry on the bed, and then one of them performed some unnecessary heavy-handed chest compressions on her.
On November 1st, 2013, ignited by the outcry over the Eryetha Mayberry case, Oklahoma became the 3rd state --- behind New Mexico and Texas --- to explicitly allow residents in long-term care
facilities to maintain surveillance cameras in their rooms. In the last two years, at least 5 states have considered similar legislation.
["Watchful Eye in Nursing Homes", The New York Times, November 18, 2013 /Jan Hoffman]
an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com , (410) 730-5016 or
(410) 720-6129. " We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."\
The tragic real-life story of Eryetha Mayberry gives credence to the value of having hidden motion-activated video cameras in the rooms of nursing home residents.
In 2012, after noticing that her 96-year old dementia-suffering mother's (Eryetha Mayberry's) gifts
were disappearing from her room in the nursing home in Oklahoma City, Doris Racher placed a motion-activated camera in the room. What she and her family discovered was a situation much worse than theft.
The video-camera revealed two female nursing home aides torturing the helpless Eryetha Mayberry.
While one aide stuffed latex gloves into Mrs. Mayberry's mouth, the other one taunted her by tapping on Mrs. Mayberry's head and laughing at her. Unceremoniously hoisting her from her wheelchair, the two culprits literally flung Mrs. Mayberry on the bed, and then one of them performed some unnecessary heavy-handed chest compressions on her.
On November 1st, 2013, ignited by the outcry over the Eryetha Mayberry case, Oklahoma became the 3rd state --- behind New Mexico and Texas --- to explicitly allow residents in long-term care
facilities to maintain surveillance cameras in their rooms. In the last two years, at least 5 states have considered similar legislation.
["Watchful Eye in Nursing Homes", The New York Times, November 18, 2013 /Jan Hoffman]
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND REPORT ON NURSING HOME ABUSE, www.charles...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND REPORT ON NURSING HOME ABUSE, www.charles...: The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is highly-regarded and very successful in the area of prosec...
MARYLAND REPORT ON NURSING HOME ABUSE, www.charlesjeromeware.com
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is highly-regarded and very successful in the area of prosecuting nursing home abuse cases. The firm is conveniently headquartered in the Maryland - D.C. metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129. The information provided in
this blog is for informational purposes only, and is not to be considered legal advice; nor does this information create an attorney-client relationship with the reader.
Elder abuse and nursing home abuse are increasing problems in our society--- including here in the Maryland - D.C. metropolitan area. There is probably no area of personal injury law where Federal and State regulation is more prominent or important than nursing home negligence. The Federal
regulatory scheme is comprehensive and applies to the vast majority of nursing home facilities.
States such as Maryland also regulate nursing homes, and the state regulatory scheme can enhance or supplement the Federal program. The federal regulatory scheme sets the bar and the State can raise the bar, but the state cannot lower the bar. The doctrine of preemption would render conflicting State law inapposite in those circumstances.
In 2010, there were 5,961,568 elderly abuse cases reported in the U.S. This figure represented 9.5%
of the elderly population in the U.S. at that time. 58.5% of these abuse cases were attributable to
neglect; 15.7% were reported as physical abuse; 12.3% were recorded as financial abuse; 7.3%
were listed as emotional abuse; 0.04% were categorized as sexual abuse; and 5.16% were listed as
" all other types/unknown" abuse.
67.3% of these elderly abuse victims were women; and the median age of all reported elderly abuse victims in 2010 was 77.9 years of age.
66.4% of all victims were white; 18.7% were black; and 10.4% were Hispanic. [http://www.statisticbrain.com/Elderly Abuse Statistics; National Center on Elder Abuse, Bureau of Justice Statistics (6-18-2013)]
There are currently 16,100 nursing homes in the U.S.
There are presently 1.7 million nursing home beds in those 16,100 nursing homes.
The current occupancy rate for these U.S. nursing homes is 86%.
The number of current nursing home residents is 1.5 million.
the average length of time since admission (current residents) is 835 days.
[http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/nursingh.htm; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]
this blog is for informational purposes only, and is not to be considered legal advice; nor does this information create an attorney-client relationship with the reader.
Elder abuse and nursing home abuse are increasing problems in our society--- including here in the Maryland - D.C. metropolitan area. There is probably no area of personal injury law where Federal and State regulation is more prominent or important than nursing home negligence. The Federal
regulatory scheme is comprehensive and applies to the vast majority of nursing home facilities.
States such as Maryland also regulate nursing homes, and the state regulatory scheme can enhance or supplement the Federal program. The federal regulatory scheme sets the bar and the State can raise the bar, but the state cannot lower the bar. The doctrine of preemption would render conflicting State law inapposite in those circumstances.
In 2010, there were 5,961,568 elderly abuse cases reported in the U.S. This figure represented 9.5%
of the elderly population in the U.S. at that time. 58.5% of these abuse cases were attributable to
neglect; 15.7% were reported as physical abuse; 12.3% were recorded as financial abuse; 7.3%
were listed as emotional abuse; 0.04% were categorized as sexual abuse; and 5.16% were listed as
" all other types/unknown" abuse.
67.3% of these elderly abuse victims were women; and the median age of all reported elderly abuse victims in 2010 was 77.9 years of age.
66.4% of all victims were white; 18.7% were black; and 10.4% were Hispanic. [http://www.statisticbrain.com/Elderly Abuse Statistics; National Center on Elder Abuse, Bureau of Justice Statistics (6-18-2013)]
There are currently 16,100 nursing homes in the U.S.
There are presently 1.7 million nursing home beds in those 16,100 nursing homes.
The current occupancy rate for these U.S. nursing homes is 86%.
The number of current nursing home residents is 1.5 million.
the average length of time since admission (current residents) is 835 days.
[http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/nursingh.htm; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND HOLIDAY DRUNK DRIVI...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND HOLIDAY DRUNK DRIVI...: The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND HOLIDAY DRUNK DRIVING DEFENSE,www.charles... : www.charlesjeromeware.com . " Here to make a differen...
MARYLAND/D.C. "HIDDEN CAMERA" NURSING HOME ABUSE : www.charlesjeromeware.com
www.charlesjeromeware.com . " We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
The Watchful Eye of Hidden Cameras in Nursing Homes : Suspicions Confirmed ?
Increasingly in the United States, instances of nursing home abuse have been captured on hidden cameras. That includes here in Maryland and Washington, D. C. Three states --- New Mexico, Texas, and Oklahoma --- have enacted laws explicitly permitting nursing home residents in long-term care facilities to maintain surveillance cameras in their rooms. In the last two years, at least five additional states have considered similar legislation.
Federal law defines " nursing home abuse " of a patient or resident as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish.
" Caught On Tape: 96-Year Old Woman Tortured In Oklahoma Nursing Home"
The recently highly-publicized nursing home abuse case of 96-year old Eryetha Mayberry emphasizes the value of hidden cameras in nursing homes. In sum, two female nursing aides who worked at the Quail Creek Nursing Home and Retirement Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, were caught on hidden camera by Ms. Mayberry's family torturing her. One of the aides, Lucy Gakunga, has been tried and convicted, and sentenced to two years in jail. The second aide, Caroline Kaskea, is on the run --- perhaps back to her home in Nigeria.
Eryetha Mayberry was a "silent victim" in that she could not speak because of her severe stroke, suffered from Alzheimer's disease, and otherwise was in a very frail condition. The hidden vide recording showed the two caretakers, among other acts, shoving rubber gloves into Ms. Mayberry's mouth, tapping and pushing her head disrespectfully and dangerously, hoisting her from her wheelchair and flinging her onto her bed, performing unnecessary heavy-handed chest massages, and generally taunting this helpless woman.
["Watchful Eye In Nursing Homes", The New York Times, Tuesday, November 19, 2013, page D1, by Jan Hoffman; http://www.news9.com/story/21549544/"Family In OKC Nursing Home Abuse Case Frustrated By Investigation", March 7, 2012]
If you suspect that a relative or friend living in a nursing home or assisted living facility within the Maryland and Washington, D. C. metropolitan area might be suffering from neglect or abuse, contact the nationally-recognized and respected nursing home abuse and neglect attorneys at Charles Jerome Ware, P. A., Attorneys & Counselors, at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129.
The Watchful Eye of Hidden Cameras in Nursing Homes : Suspicions Confirmed ?
Increasingly in the United States, instances of nursing home abuse have been captured on hidden cameras. That includes here in Maryland and Washington, D. C. Three states --- New Mexico, Texas, and Oklahoma --- have enacted laws explicitly permitting nursing home residents in long-term care facilities to maintain surveillance cameras in their rooms. In the last two years, at least five additional states have considered similar legislation.
Federal law defines " nursing home abuse " of a patient or resident as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish.
" Caught On Tape: 96-Year Old Woman Tortured In Oklahoma Nursing Home"
The recently highly-publicized nursing home abuse case of 96-year old Eryetha Mayberry emphasizes the value of hidden cameras in nursing homes. In sum, two female nursing aides who worked at the Quail Creek Nursing Home and Retirement Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, were caught on hidden camera by Ms. Mayberry's family torturing her. One of the aides, Lucy Gakunga, has been tried and convicted, and sentenced to two years in jail. The second aide, Caroline Kaskea, is on the run --- perhaps back to her home in Nigeria.
Eryetha Mayberry was a "silent victim" in that she could not speak because of her severe stroke, suffered from Alzheimer's disease, and otherwise was in a very frail condition. The hidden vide recording showed the two caretakers, among other acts, shoving rubber gloves into Ms. Mayberry's mouth, tapping and pushing her head disrespectfully and dangerously, hoisting her from her wheelchair and flinging her onto her bed, performing unnecessary heavy-handed chest massages, and generally taunting this helpless woman.
["Watchful Eye In Nursing Homes", The New York Times, Tuesday, November 19, 2013, page D1, by Jan Hoffman; http://www.news9.com/story/21549544/"Family In OKC Nursing Home Abuse Case Frustrated By Investigation", March 7, 2012]
If you suspect that a relative or friend living in a nursing home or assisted living facility within the Maryland and Washington, D. C. metropolitan area might be suffering from neglect or abuse, contact the nationally-recognized and respected nursing home abuse and neglect attorneys at Charles Jerome Ware, P. A., Attorneys & Counselors, at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129.
Monday, November 18, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND HOLIDAY DRUNK DRIVING DEFENSE,www.charles...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND HOLIDAY DRUNK DRIVING DEFENSE,www.charles...: www.charlesjeromeware.com . " Here to make a difference." We fight, you win. Dateline: Monday, November 18, 2013. It's ...
MARYLAND HOLIDAY DRUNK DRIVING DEFENSE,www.charlesjeromeware.com
www.charlesjeromeware.com. " Here to make a difference." We fight, you win.
Dateline: Monday, November 18, 2013.
It's that time of the year again : The Holidays ! For the next seven weeks or so many
people will be celebrating the holidays with alcoholic drinks and merriment.
Few people in Maryland do not enjoy the holidays; with all the goodwill and good cheer,
followed with generous toasts to seal the joyous mood.
Regular followers of my legal blogs have read previous entries from me about the hazards of drinking and driving. I will take this opportunity to repeat my advice: Do not drink and drive.
However, if you make the mistake of drinking and driving, and you are arrested, contact us
immediately at Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, for legal advice, consultation,
and representation : www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129.
Our high success record in drunk driving cases speaks for itself.
Dateline: Monday, November 18, 2013.
It's that time of the year again : The Holidays ! For the next seven weeks or so many
people will be celebrating the holidays with alcoholic drinks and merriment.
Few people in Maryland do not enjoy the holidays; with all the goodwill and good cheer,
followed with generous toasts to seal the joyous mood.
Regular followers of my legal blogs have read previous entries from me about the hazards of drinking and driving. I will take this opportunity to repeat my advice: Do not drink and drive.
However, if you make the mistake of drinking and driving, and you are arrested, contact us
immediately at Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, for legal advice, consultation,
and representation : www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129.
Our high success record in drunk driving cases speaks for itself.
Sunday, November 17, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: HOSTILE BLOGS & CHANGE OF VENUE : ATTY. CHARLES WA...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: HOSTILE BLOGS & CHANGE OF VENUE : ATTY. CHARLES WA...: www.charlesjeromeware.com . " Here to make a difference." We fight, you win. Increasingly in Maryland and other states hostile ...
HOSTILE BLOGS & CHANGE OF VENUE : ATTY. CHARLES WARE'S MD. TRIAL UPDATE
www.charlesjeromeware.com. " Here to make a difference." We fight, you win.
Increasingly in Maryland and other states hostile blogs about parties in lawsuits are being
placed on the Internet. To the victims/subjects of these hostile/biased blogs the major issue
becomes whether these blogs can negatively impact their rights to a fair trial ("day in court").
The most immediate remedy that comes to mind in this type of situation would be a request for
change of venue for the case.
Thus far, to our knowledge, Maryland has not as yet published a decision that deals directly with
this issue. Therefore, looking to other legal jurisdictions that have published decisions on this
issue, we go to Arizona.
A U.S. District Court in Arizona ruled that biased Web blogs that expressed hostility towards the plaintiffs' case did not provide sufficient grounds for change of venue to minimize the chances of jury bias. In particular, the court did not find such blogs to be sufficiently representative of the large
pool of people from which the jury would be drawn, or that the blogs adversely influenced the pool as a whole [ Gotbaum ex rel Gotbaum v. City of Phoenix, Case No. CV-08-0937-PHX-DGC (D. Ariz.,
Oct. 17, 2008) ].
Increasingly in Maryland and other states hostile blogs about parties in lawsuits are being
placed on the Internet. To the victims/subjects of these hostile/biased blogs the major issue
becomes whether these blogs can negatively impact their rights to a fair trial ("day in court").
The most immediate remedy that comes to mind in this type of situation would be a request for
change of venue for the case.
Thus far, to our knowledge, Maryland has not as yet published a decision that deals directly with
this issue. Therefore, looking to other legal jurisdictions that have published decisions on this
issue, we go to Arizona.
A U.S. District Court in Arizona ruled that biased Web blogs that expressed hostility towards the plaintiffs' case did not provide sufficient grounds for change of venue to minimize the chances of jury bias. In particular, the court did not find such blogs to be sufficiently representative of the large
pool of people from which the jury would be drawn, or that the blogs adversely influenced the pool as a whole [ Gotbaum ex rel Gotbaum v. City of Phoenix, Case No. CV-08-0937-PHX-DGC (D. Ariz.,
Oct. 17, 2008) ].
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: COMMON ILLEGAL JOB INTERVIEW QUESTIONS : MD. EMPLO...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: COMMON ILLEGAL JOB INTERVIEW QUESTIONS : MD. EMPLO...: Conveniently headquartered in the Maryland-- District of Columbia metropolitan area, Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors i...
COMMON ILLEGAL JOB INTERVIEW QUESTIONS : MD. EMPLOYER ALERT !, www.charlesjeromeware.com
Conveniently headquartered in the Maryland-- District of Columbia metropolitan area, Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors is a nationally-known and respected boutique law firm
that contains a highly successful employment and discrimination law practice. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129. The following information is not considered legal advice, and should not be interpreted as such.
Employers and employees should be on alert in job interviews to the following illegal questions,
among others:
1. Have you ever been arrested ? Do not ask this question. The more acceptable question is "Have you ever been convicted of a crime ? "
2. Are you married ? This a no-no. It is problematically discriminatory for a number of reasons.
3. What religious holidays do you practice ? Religious discrimination risk here. A more appropriate
question might be, for example, " Are you available to work on Sundays ? ", etc.
4. Do you have children ? Problematically discriminatory. Better questions might be " What hours can you work ?", or "Do you have responsibilities other than work that may interfere with specific
job requirements such as traveling ? "
5. What country are you from ? This is a potential national origin discrimination question. A better question might be to ask the applicant ( if job relevant) whether they are authorized to work in a certain country.
6. Is English your first language ? However, you may ask the applicant what other languages he or she reads, speaks or writes fluently.
7. Do you have any outstanding debt ? The employer must have the applicant's clearly expressed
permission prior to inquiries into the applicant's financial and criminal backgrounds.\
8. Do you drink socially ? Believe it or not, this question violates the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
9. When was the last time you used illegal drugs? A more acceptable question might be to ask the
applicant if they are currently using illegal drugs.
10. How long (generally) have you been working ? A no-no; allows the interviewer /employer to guess your age. Although, as you know, this type of information can be gleaned from the Internet these days.
11. What type of discharge did you receive from the military? What you can ask is what type of
education, training or work experience the applicant received in the military.
[ http://msn.careerbuilder.com/article/msn-3503-11/common interview questions that are actually illegal; also see, Business Insider]
that contains a highly successful employment and discrimination law practice. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129. The following information is not considered legal advice, and should not be interpreted as such.
Employers and employees should be on alert in job interviews to the following illegal questions,
among others:
1. Have you ever been arrested ? Do not ask this question. The more acceptable question is "Have you ever been convicted of a crime ? "
2. Are you married ? This a no-no. It is problematically discriminatory for a number of reasons.
3. What religious holidays do you practice ? Religious discrimination risk here. A more appropriate
question might be, for example, " Are you available to work on Sundays ? ", etc.
4. Do you have children ? Problematically discriminatory. Better questions might be " What hours can you work ?", or "Do you have responsibilities other than work that may interfere with specific
job requirements such as traveling ? "
5. What country are you from ? This is a potential national origin discrimination question. A better question might be to ask the applicant ( if job relevant) whether they are authorized to work in a certain country.
6. Is English your first language ? However, you may ask the applicant what other languages he or she reads, speaks or writes fluently.
7. Do you have any outstanding debt ? The employer must have the applicant's clearly expressed
permission prior to inquiries into the applicant's financial and criminal backgrounds.\
8. Do you drink socially ? Believe it or not, this question violates the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
9. When was the last time you used illegal drugs? A more acceptable question might be to ask the
applicant if they are currently using illegal drugs.
10. How long (generally) have you been working ? A no-no; allows the interviewer /employer to guess your age. Although, as you know, this type of information can be gleaned from the Internet these days.
11. What type of discharge did you receive from the military? What you can ask is what type of
education, training or work experience the applicant received in the military.
[ http://msn.careerbuilder.com/article/msn-3503-11/common interview questions that are actually illegal; also see, Business Insider]
Saturday, November 9, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND DRUG POSSESSION DEFENSES : www.charlesjer...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND DRUG POSSESSION DEFENSES : www.charlesjer...: The premiere criminal defense law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, ...
MARYLAND DRUG POSSESSION DEFENSES : www.charlesjeromeware.com
The premiere criminal defense law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. This well- regarded and highly-successful firm provides an initial courtesy consultation for criminal defense clients : www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, (410) 720-6129. The firm's two very popular mottos are " Here to make a difference" and " We fight, you win."
If you are charged with possession of drugs, either for personal use or with intent to sell or distribute,
this criminal defense law firm can be extremely helpful in determining which defenses might apply to your case should you plead not guilty. We are also extremely adept at litigating/defending cases.
The following are some defenses to drug possession charges; some more common than others :
1. Unlawful search and seizure in violation of the 14th Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution and the Maryland Declaration of Rights.
2. The drugs belonged to someone else.
3. Crime Laboratory Analysis does not confirm the legitimacy of the alleged drugs.
4. Missing Drugs. The drugs alleged to be in possession of the client/defendant must be
proven to be the actual drugs found on him or her.
5. The drugs were planted on the client by law enforcement, etc.
6. Entrapment. Law enforcement officers induced the client to commit a crime that
ho or she may not otherwise have committed; and
7. The Medical Marijuana Exception.
If you are charged with possession of drugs, either for personal use or with intent to sell or distribute,
this criminal defense law firm can be extremely helpful in determining which defenses might apply to your case should you plead not guilty. We are also extremely adept at litigating/defending cases.
The following are some defenses to drug possession charges; some more common than others :
1. Unlawful search and seizure in violation of the 14th Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution and the Maryland Declaration of Rights.
2. The drugs belonged to someone else.
3. Crime Laboratory Analysis does not confirm the legitimacy of the alleged drugs.
4. Missing Drugs. The drugs alleged to be in possession of the client/defendant must be
proven to be the actual drugs found on him or her.
5. The drugs were planted on the client by law enforcement, etc.
6. Entrapment. Law enforcement officers induced the client to commit a crime that
ho or she may not otherwise have committed; and
7. The Medical Marijuana Exception.
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: HO. CO. MARYLAND DNA DEFENSE ATTORNEYS,www.charles...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: HO. CO. MARYLAND DNA DEFENSE ATTORNEYS,www.charles...: See: www.charlesjeromeware.com . We are " here to make a difference." We fight, you win. The nationally renowned and respected ...
HO. CO. MARYLAND DNA DEFENSE ATTORNEYS,www.charlesjeromeware.com
See: www.charlesjeromeware.com. We are " here to make a difference." We fight, you win.
The nationally renowned and respected criminal defense law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland -- between Baltimore and D. C. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129, or on our website, www.charlesjeromeware.com.
For condensed summaries of the 2013 U.S. Supreme Court DNA decision in MARYLAND v. KING, read Attorney Charles Ware's Radio Weblog, at http://open.salon.com/blog/charlesjware/2013/08/02/columbia_howard_county_dna_update; and
http://thelawyersmailbox.blogspot.com; and see http:// news.thelaw.tv/2013/06/17/will-the-new-dna-sample-law-help-or-hinder-criminal-defense-attorneys?
In a nutshell, the 5 to 4 U. S. Supreme Court MARYLAND v. KING decision (2013) now allows law enforcement officers to take DNA samples without a search warrant from people who have been arrested but not convicted of a crime.
This " DNA swab" is being called the 21st century fingerprinting by many.
Supporters claim the new (Maryland) DNA sampling law helps solve more crimes and will help eliminate and exonerate suspects. Critics are not so sure of that. For instance, 14th Amendment advocates fear that dissemination of DNA information could be construed as an invasion of privacy or lead to discrimination. Some fear it could be used as a fishing expedition against anyone who is arrested; and so forth.
Currently, all 50 states require DNA samples be taken from convicted felons. There are about 28 states besides Maryland that allow DNA database testing practices , as well as the Federal government.
The nationally renowned and respected criminal defense law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland -- between Baltimore and D. C. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129, or on our website, www.charlesjeromeware.com.
For condensed summaries of the 2013 U.S. Supreme Court DNA decision in MARYLAND v. KING, read Attorney Charles Ware's Radio Weblog, at http://open.salon.com/blog/charlesjware/2013/08/02/columbia_howard_county_dna_update; and
http://thelawyersmailbox.blogspot.com; and see http:// news.thelaw.tv/2013/06/17/will-the-new-dna-sample-law-help-or-hinder-criminal-defense-attorneys?
In a nutshell, the 5 to 4 U. S. Supreme Court MARYLAND v. KING decision (2013) now allows law enforcement officers to take DNA samples without a search warrant from people who have been arrested but not convicted of a crime.
This " DNA swab" is being called the 21st century fingerprinting by many.
Supporters claim the new (Maryland) DNA sampling law helps solve more crimes and will help eliminate and exonerate suspects. Critics are not so sure of that. For instance, 14th Amendment advocates fear that dissemination of DNA information could be construed as an invasion of privacy or lead to discrimination. Some fear it could be used as a fishing expedition against anyone who is arrested; and so forth.
Currently, all 50 states require DNA samples be taken from convicted felons. There are about 28 states besides Maryland that allow DNA database testing practices , as well as the Federal government.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: WORKPLACE HARASSMENT vs. BULLYING : D.C. & MARYLAN...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: WORKPLACE HARASSMENT vs. BULLYING : D.C. & MARYLAN...: The national law offices of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is a premiere nationally known and respected employment l...
WORKPLACE HARASSMENT vs. BULLYING : D.C. & MARYLAND
The national law offices of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is a premiere nationally known and respected employment law firm. The firm is conveniently headquartered
in the Maryland-D.C. metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129.
Workplace Bullying versus Workplace Harassment in Maryland and the District of Columbia
Workplace bullying and workplace harassment are similar and increasing maladies these days .
Both strive in the workplace, causing serious harm in the lives of innocent employees, and hindering
the work and missions of the employer. Workplace bullying and harassment are extremely counter-
productive as well as costly to all involved, including the employer.
While on the job bullying and harassment are closely related, they also have some differences. Such as:
- Harassment has a strong intrusive feature, including physical contact with the victim, invasion of the victim's personal space, and even damage to the victim's possessions; whereas, bullying on the job is almost always psychological.
- Workplace harassment is usually tied to sex, race, prejudice or discrimination; whereas, workplace bullying is frequently linked to a staged attack on competent, attractive , or popular individuals.
- A target of workplace harassment knows he or she is being harassed immediately; whereas, normally few people can see workplace bullying because it is usually perpetrated " behind closed doors."
- Victims of job harassment are usually subject to taunts, and offensive and aggressive vocabulary; whereas, victims of bullying abuse may not realize it for weeks or months, until great harm or damage is
done to them.
[ For more information, we recommend: http://www.jdtunbound.com/unbound-exclusive/april/2009/workplace-bullying-vs-workplace-harassment]
in the Maryland-D.C. metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129.
Workplace Bullying versus Workplace Harassment in Maryland and the District of Columbia
Workplace bullying and workplace harassment are similar and increasing maladies these days .
Both strive in the workplace, causing serious harm in the lives of innocent employees, and hindering
the work and missions of the employer. Workplace bullying and harassment are extremely counter-
productive as well as costly to all involved, including the employer.
While on the job bullying and harassment are closely related, they also have some differences. Such as:
- Harassment has a strong intrusive feature, including physical contact with the victim, invasion of the victim's personal space, and even damage to the victim's possessions; whereas, bullying on the job is almost always psychological.
- Workplace harassment is usually tied to sex, race, prejudice or discrimination; whereas, workplace bullying is frequently linked to a staged attack on competent, attractive , or popular individuals.
- A target of workplace harassment knows he or she is being harassed immediately; whereas, normally few people can see workplace bullying because it is usually perpetrated " behind closed doors."
- Victims of job harassment are usually subject to taunts, and offensive and aggressive vocabulary; whereas, victims of bullying abuse may not realize it for weeks or months, until great harm or damage is
done to them.
[ For more information, we recommend: http://www.jdtunbound.com/unbound-exclusive/april/2009/workplace-bullying-vs-workplace-harassment]
The Lawyer's Mailbox: ADDRESSING FAILED DESEGREGATION IN MARYLAND COLLEG...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: ADDRESSING FAILED DESEGREGATION IN MARYLAND COLLEG...: www.charlesjeromeware.com . " Here to make a difference." THE COALITION FOR EQUITY AND EXCELLENCE IN MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION ...
ADDRESSING FAILED DESEGREGATION IN MARYLAND COLLEGES : COALITION, ET AL. v. MHEC,ET AL.
www.charlesjeromeware.com. " Here to make a difference."
THE COALITION FOR EQUITY AND EXCELLENCE IN MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION (COALITION), et al., v. MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION (MHEC), et al., Civil No. CCB-
06-2773, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Decision by U.S. District Court Judge Catherine C. Blake ( October7, 2013).
This Federal civil rights case rises under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Plaintiffs allege that the defendants State of Maryland, et al., have failed to desegregate Maryland's system of higher education as required by Federal law under the framework articulated in United States v. Fordice, 505 U.S. 717 (1992). The Court agreed with Plaintiffs, and observed as follows, inter alia:
* * * As the parties involved in this long-running litigation agree, Maryland
had a shameful history of de jure segregation throughtout much of the past century.
Public higher education opportunities for African Americans were either non-existent or decidedly inferior to the opportunities afforded to white citizens. * * * Remedies will be required.
* * * *
THE COALITION FOR EQUITY AND EXCELLENCE IN MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION (COALITION), et al., v. MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION (MHEC), et al., Civil No. CCB-
06-2773, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Decision by U.S. District Court Judge Catherine C. Blake ( October7, 2013).
This Federal civil rights case rises under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Plaintiffs allege that the defendants State of Maryland, et al., have failed to desegregate Maryland's system of higher education as required by Federal law under the framework articulated in United States v. Fordice, 505 U.S. 717 (1992). The Court agreed with Plaintiffs, and observed as follows, inter alia:
* * * As the parties involved in this long-running litigation agree, Maryland
had a shameful history of de jure segregation throughtout much of the past century.
Public higher education opportunities for African Americans were either non-existent or decidedly inferior to the opportunities afforded to white citizens. * * * Remedies will be required.
* * * *
The Lawyer's Mailbox: " PERSONAL INJURY 101 " : Maryland Business Monthl...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: " PERSONAL INJURY 101 " : Maryland Business Monthl...: This brief excerpt is taken from the award-winning original article written by successful personal injury attorney Charles Jerome Ware in 19...
" PERSONAL INJURY 101 " : Maryland Business Monthly
This brief excerpt is taken from the award-winning original article written by successful personal injury attorney Charles Jerome Ware in 1998 in : THE BUSINESS MONTHLY : The Business Newspaper of Howard County, Columbia & Laurel, Volume 6, Number 6 ( June 1998), page 21. This popular article on basic personal injury law is still very much relevant and material in today's personal injury
environment :
" By definition, 'personal injury law' is that area of law designed to protect you and your property when injury or harm is inflicted because of somebody else's act or failure to act. It is also known as 'tort law'. In a successful personal injury or tort action, the person who caused the injury or harm is called upon to compensate the person who suffered the losses. Generally there are three established theories of personal injury or tort liability : negligence, strict liability and intentional misconduct.
* * * Negligence is the basis for liability in the majority of personal injury lawsuits, including automobile accidents and medical malpractice. * * * In the area of strict liability, designers and
manufacturers are held strictly liable for injuries caused by their defective products. * * * Intentional
misconduct claims of personal injury or tort liability must allege and prove more than just careless actions by another person. It must be alleged and proved that the offending person intended to engage in the offending conduct that he or she engaged in.
* * * Automobiles are at the center of more lawsuits in the United States than anything else, and
' automobile accidents' is the area in which the majority of personal injury actions arise. * * *
Every personal injury or tort claim ... has two basic issues: liability and damages. * * * If you can prove liability and damages, you are in the money : our American system of justice will award you
compensation for your loss. * * * *
[ Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is nationally-recognized as a premiere personal injury and wrongful death lawyer. He is founder and president of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors,
a highly respected and successful boutique national law firm which is headquartered conveniently in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 720-6129, or (410) 730-5016. We are " here to make a difference." We fight, you win. ]
environment :
" By definition, 'personal injury law' is that area of law designed to protect you and your property when injury or harm is inflicted because of somebody else's act or failure to act. It is also known as 'tort law'. In a successful personal injury or tort action, the person who caused the injury or harm is called upon to compensate the person who suffered the losses. Generally there are three established theories of personal injury or tort liability : negligence, strict liability and intentional misconduct.
* * * Negligence is the basis for liability in the majority of personal injury lawsuits, including automobile accidents and medical malpractice. * * * In the area of strict liability, designers and
manufacturers are held strictly liable for injuries caused by their defective products. * * * Intentional
misconduct claims of personal injury or tort liability must allege and prove more than just careless actions by another person. It must be alleged and proved that the offending person intended to engage in the offending conduct that he or she engaged in.
* * * Automobiles are at the center of more lawsuits in the United States than anything else, and
' automobile accidents' is the area in which the majority of personal injury actions arise. * * *
Every personal injury or tort claim ... has two basic issues: liability and damages. * * * If you can prove liability and damages, you are in the money : our American system of justice will award you
compensation for your loss. * * * *
[ Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is nationally-recognized as a premiere personal injury and wrongful death lawyer. He is founder and president of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors,
a highly respected and successful boutique national law firm which is headquartered conveniently in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 720-6129, or (410) 730-5016. We are " here to make a difference." We fight, you win. ]
Monday, November 4, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND DIVORCE " HOWARD COUNTY STYLE "
The Lawyer's Mailbox: MARYLAND DIVORCE " HOWARD COUNTY STYLE ": www.charlesjeromeware.com . For an initial courtesy consultation concerning divorce and other family law matters, contact one of Maryland...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: DEFERRED PROSECUTION 101 : MARYLAND & D. C.,www.ch...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: DEFERRED PROSECUTION 101 : MARYLAND & D. C.,www.ch...: www.charlesjeromeware.com . The national premiere criminal defense law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is con...
DEFERRED PROSECUTION 101 : MARYLAND & D. C.,www.charlesjeromeware.com
www.charlesjeromeware.com. The national premiere criminal defense law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, is conveniently headquartered in the Baltimore- Washington metropolitan area, in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at (410) 730-5016 or (410) 720-6129.
In sum, a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) is a voluntary alternative to adjudication (trial)
in which the prosecutor in a federal criminal case agrees to grant a form of "amnesty" to the defendant in exchange for the defendant's specific cooperation ( agreeing to fulfill certain requirements) [ U.S. Attorneys' Manual, Section 9-28.1000 (2008), Collateral Consequences,http://www.justice.gov/usao, and Section 9-16.325 (2008),Plea Agreements, Deferred Prosecution Agreements, Non-Prosecution Agreements and " Extraordinary Restitution"].
The DPA is very similar to the non-prosecution agreement (NPA) [ Lauren Giudice, " Regulating Corruption", Boston University Law Review, Vol. 91, pages 347,361 (2011) ] . It should be noted that DPAs are normally filed with the court, whereas NPAs are not.
For instance, a case of corporate fraud might be settled by means of a deferred-prosecution agreement in which the defendant agrees to pay fines, implement corporate reforms, and fully cooperate with the investigation. Fulfillment by the corporate defendant of the specified requirements will then result in a dismissal of the charges against it/him/her.
Since 199 the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has set forth guidelines concerning the prosecution of business organizations and corporations. The U.S. Attorneys' Manual (USAM) of the DOF allows consideration of non-prosecution or deferred prosecution of corporate criminal offenses because of collateral consequences and discusses plea agreements, deferred prosecution agreements, and non-prosecution agreements in general.
In sum, a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) is a voluntary alternative to adjudication (trial)
in which the prosecutor in a federal criminal case agrees to grant a form of "amnesty" to the defendant in exchange for the defendant's specific cooperation ( agreeing to fulfill certain requirements) [ U.S. Attorneys' Manual, Section 9-28.1000 (2008), Collateral Consequences,http://www.justice.gov/usao, and Section 9-16.325 (2008),Plea Agreements, Deferred Prosecution Agreements, Non-Prosecution Agreements and " Extraordinary Restitution"].
The DPA is very similar to the non-prosecution agreement (NPA) [ Lauren Giudice, " Regulating Corruption", Boston University Law Review, Vol. 91, pages 347,361 (2011) ] . It should be noted that DPAs are normally filed with the court, whereas NPAs are not.
For instance, a case of corporate fraud might be settled by means of a deferred-prosecution agreement in which the defendant agrees to pay fines, implement corporate reforms, and fully cooperate with the investigation. Fulfillment by the corporate defendant of the specified requirements will then result in a dismissal of the charges against it/him/her.
Since 199 the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has set forth guidelines concerning the prosecution of business organizations and corporations. The U.S. Attorneys' Manual (USAM) of the DOF allows consideration of non-prosecution or deferred prosecution of corporate criminal offenses because of collateral consequences and discusses plea agreements, deferred prosecution agreements, and non-prosecution agreements in general.
MARYLAND DIVORCE " HOWARD COUNTY STYLE "
www.charlesjeromeware.com. For an initial courtesy consultation concerning divorce and other family law matters, contact one of Maryland's premiere divorce law firms, CHARLESJEROMEWARE, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland, at (410) 730-5016, or (410) 720-6129. We are " here to make a difference."
It has been almost three decades since the boutique national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, was opened in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. And, in those almost thirty years this highly regarded and extremely successful law firm has seen many clients come in for the same standard divorce reasons: a change in the lifestyles that come with having children, financial stress, cultural conflicts, and living in one of the wealthiest counties in the nation.
The reasons for divorce frequently are the same no matter the jurisdiction, and Howard County is no different in some sense. It's just that divorce is less common in Howard County than in others in Maryland.
At 7.5 % of the county's marriages, Howard County's divorce rate is not only lower than the National average of 10.4 percent and the state's average of 9.5%, it is in fact the lowest in Maryland. Carroll County is second in Maryland with 7.9 percent and Montgomery County is third with 8.0 percent.
According to U.S. Census Bureau survey estimates from 2005 through 2009, 10.4 % of people nationwide age 15 and older are divorced.
Apparently, prosperity can help make a marriage more successful, while poverty makes a marriage relationship more likely to fail. There appears to be no coincidence that Carroll County's median household income of $75,000 is well above the national average, and that both Howard County and Montgomery County are at the top as two of the most affluent jurisdictions in the United States.
Indeed, we can all agree that financial stresses, particularly in today's problematic economy, can contribute significantly to a married couple's discord and ultimate divorce.
It has been almost three decades since the boutique national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counselors, was opened in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland. And, in those almost thirty years this highly regarded and extremely successful law firm has seen many clients come in for the same standard divorce reasons: a change in the lifestyles that come with having children, financial stress, cultural conflicts, and living in one of the wealthiest counties in the nation.
The reasons for divorce frequently are the same no matter the jurisdiction, and Howard County is no different in some sense. It's just that divorce is less common in Howard County than in others in Maryland.
At 7.5 % of the county's marriages, Howard County's divorce rate is not only lower than the National average of 10.4 percent and the state's average of 9.5%, it is in fact the lowest in Maryland. Carroll County is second in Maryland with 7.9 percent and Montgomery County is third with 8.0 percent.
According to U.S. Census Bureau survey estimates from 2005 through 2009, 10.4 % of people nationwide age 15 and older are divorced.
Apparently, prosperity can help make a marriage more successful, while poverty makes a marriage relationship more likely to fail. There appears to be no coincidence that Carroll County's median household income of $75,000 is well above the national average, and that both Howard County and Montgomery County are at the top as two of the most affluent jurisdictions in the United States.
Indeed, we can all agree that financial stresses, particularly in today's problematic economy, can contribute significantly to a married couple's discord and ultimate divorce.
Sunday, November 3, 2013
The Lawyer's Mailbox: BLACK POLICE CASE EQUALS CAPITOL HILL "BLACK EYE",...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: BLACK POLICE CASE EQUALS CAPITOL HILL "BLACK EYE",...: Excerpts from the newspaper article written by NNPA Washington, D.C. correspondent Hazel Trice Edney: " BLACK POLICE DISCRIMINATION CO...
BLACK POLICE CASE EQUALS CAPITOL HILL "BLACK EYE", www.charlesjeromeware.com
Excerpts from the newspaper article written by NNPA Washington, D.C. correspondent Hazel Trice Edney: " BLACK POLICE DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT GIVES CAPITOL HILL 'BLACK EYE' : Use of KKK , ' N-word' reveals level of American racism, Black officers charge", Page A2, THE WASHINGTON AFRO-AMERICAN, April28,2001 -May 4, 2001 :
... In what is being called a " black eye for Capitol Hill " and a symptom of the level of racism in America, more than 200 members of the U.S. Capitol Black Police Association have filed a multi-million dollar class-action complaint against the police force and prominent members of the U.S. Congress, claiming rabid race and sex discrimination..
' This is a black eye for Capitol Hill,' said Charles Jerome Ware, the Columbia, Maryland lawyer representing the group of Black officers, told the NNPA. He said depending on the number of complaints --- which he said are still mounting --- and on how far the plaintiffs go back, the suit could amount to more than $ 100 million.
He (Ware) says the charges involved in the suit are symptomatic of racism in America.
******
The 50-page complaint filed by Attorney Ware documents 15 race-and-gender related charges and outlines outrageous incidents on the force, 'N-word' by White officers toward Black officers and Black civilians and a Ku Klux Klan calling card placed in the locker of a Black officer.
******
The force has 1,220 members. Of that total, 357 are Black (29 percent), according to the complaint. ****** "
[ The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors, is headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland, in the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact this renowned and highly-regarded law firm at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 (410) 720-6129. ]
... In what is being called a " black eye for Capitol Hill " and a symptom of the level of racism in America, more than 200 members of the U.S. Capitol Black Police Association have filed a multi-million dollar class-action complaint against the police force and prominent members of the U.S. Congress, claiming rabid race and sex discrimination..
' This is a black eye for Capitol Hill,' said Charles Jerome Ware, the Columbia, Maryland lawyer representing the group of Black officers, told the NNPA. He said depending on the number of complaints --- which he said are still mounting --- and on how far the plaintiffs go back, the suit could amount to more than $ 100 million.
He (Ware) says the charges involved in the suit are symptomatic of racism in America.
******
The 50-page complaint filed by Attorney Ware documents 15 race-and-gender related charges and outlines outrageous incidents on the force, 'N-word' by White officers toward Black officers and Black civilians and a Ku Klux Klan calling card placed in the locker of a Black officer.
******
The force has 1,220 members. Of that total, 357 are Black (29 percent), according to the complaint. ****** "
[ The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors, is headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland, in the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact this renowned and highly-regarded law firm at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016 (410) 720-6129. ]
The Lawyer's Mailbox: CHARLES JEROME WARE,P.A.: MARYLAND'S PREMIERE " BO...
The Lawyer's Mailbox: CHARLES JEROME WARE,P.A.: MARYLAND'S PREMIERE " BO...: Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors, is nationally renowned and respected for being Maryland's premiere "boutique&q...
CHARLES JEROME WARE,P.A.: MARYLAND'S PREMIERE " BOUTIQUE" LAW FIRM
Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors, is nationally renowned and respected for being Maryland's premiere "boutique" law firm : concentrating in the legal areas of civil litigation, wrongful death, serious personal injury (including car accidents), medical/healthcare malpractice, family law, criminal defense, lead paint defense, discrimination and employment law, corporate law, entertainment law, estates & trusts, and elder law. For an initial courtesy consultation, contact us at www.charlesjeromeware.com, (410) 730-5016, (410) 720-6129.
The founder and president of this recognized national law firm, attorney Charles Jerome Ware, is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counselors in the United States [ The Washington Post, The New York Times, GQ Magazine, The Baltimore Sun, The Howard County,Maryland Times, The Columbia Flier, The Anniston,Alabama Star, USA TODAY, American Lawyer Media, The Baltimore Afro-American, The Washington Afro-American, inter alia ].
Recently, in 2013, the firm has seen an increase in its representation of clients in wrongful death and serious car injury cases, as well as Baltimore lead paint defense , criminal auto defense and drug-related criminal defense matters.
The firm is known for its two popular mottos : " Here to make a difference" and " We fight, you win."
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors, has successfully been in business since 1988. The firm is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland, short distances from Baltimore, D.C, and the BWI international airport. The firm maintains limousine service for its clients between its headquarters in Columbia and the airport as
well the BWI train station.
The founder and president of this recognized national law firm, attorney Charles Jerome Ware, is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counselors in the United States [ The Washington Post, The New York Times, GQ Magazine, The Baltimore Sun, The Howard County,Maryland Times, The Columbia Flier, The Anniston,Alabama Star, USA TODAY, American Lawyer Media, The Baltimore Afro-American, The Washington Afro-American, inter alia ].
Recently, in 2013, the firm has seen an increase in its representation of clients in wrongful death and serious car injury cases, as well as Baltimore lead paint defense , criminal auto defense and drug-related criminal defense matters.
The firm is known for its two popular mottos : " Here to make a difference" and " We fight, you win."
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counselors, has successfully been in business since 1988. The firm is conveniently headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland, short distances from Baltimore, D.C, and the BWI international airport. The firm maintains limousine service for its clients between its headquarters in Columbia and the airport as
well the BWI train station.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)